Season 19 powered by Tt eSPORTS

Division 5C

Week 1

Round commencing: -
This match is affected by one or more wildcards.

Schedule deadline: | Result deadline:

Date Scheduled:
Results submitted:
by Mearlite (The Demolition Inquisition [Dead])

cp_badlands

cp_badlands

3 - 7

[Screenshots: A ]

cp_process_final

cp_process_final

1 - 6

[Screenshots: A ]

Sweden Team IKEA vs European The Demolition Inquisition [Dead]
0 - 6

Active Wildcards:

SteamID Screenshots: A

Players

The Demolition Inquisition [Dead] (6) Daniel Cox, Tergnos, engkvist, Insanity癇, Abyss, Mearlite
Team IKEA (4) Maxi, Lyrete, ManTouched, Shoosh
Unrostered (2) Khaos, simpleaspossible

105 Comments

  1. Lyrete: BAGC - RUN! said:

    would prefer thu at 8pm cest

  2. Collaide: gatekeeper said:

    Mearly ftw

  3. Mearlite: JEPIC said:

    you mean this thursday or next?

  4. Mearlite: JEPIC said:

    ok i assume you mean 02/10/14

  5. Mearlite: JEPIC said:

    we would prefer monday 21:00 cest or 20:30 cest

  6. Lyrete: BAGC - RUN! said:

    monday is a no go because of ugc, any day after that is doable at 8.30

  7. Lyrete: BAGC - RUN! said:

    actually nvm wednesday is not doable.

  8. Default Date said:

    Because this match has not been scheduled by either of the teams, a default date has been set for this match.
    The default date is: Sunday, 05 October 2014, 20:30
    Please play this match on the appointed time and submit the results.

  9. Mearlite: JEPIC said:

    we can do thursday 20:00 cest

  10. Lyrete: BAGC - RUN! said:

    Yo, do you allow http://etf2l.org/forum/user/75427/ as a merc?

  11. Abyss: ᴅᴵ said:

    No.

  12. Wildcard said:

    A wildcard has been used for this match by Lyrete.tf.

    You must reschedule this match before October 9, 2014 CEST and play it before October 19, 2014 CEST.

  13. Lyrete: BAGC - RUN! said:

    thu 8.15pm cest this time?

  14. Default Date said:

    Because this match has not been scheduled by either of the teams, a default date has been set for this match.
    The default date is: Thursday, 16 October 2014, 20:15
    Please play this match on the appointed time and submit the results.

  15. Wildcard said:

    A wildcard has been used for this match by The Demolition Inquisition.

    You must reschedule this match before October 23, 2014 CEST and play it before November 2, 2014 CET.

  16. Mearlite: JEPIC said:

    cannot do 27th-30th, other days should be better

  17. Lyrete: BAGC - RUN! said:

    26th?

  18. Mearlite: JEPIC said:

    actually we can do 27th

  19. Default Date said:

    Because this match has not been scheduled by either of the teams, a default date has been set for this match.
    The default date is: Friday, 31 October 2014, 20:45
    Please play this match on the appointed time and submit the results.

  20. Mearlite: JEPIC said:

    good job default date

  21. Lyrete: BAGC - RUN! said:

    can we use http://etf2l.org/forum/user/88729/ as a merc?

  22. Abyss: ᴅᴵ said:

    What class would he play?

  23. Lyrete: BAGC - RUN! said:

    solly?

  24. Lyrete: BAGC - RUN! said:

    11:42 PM – ᴅᴵ Abyss: this one allowed http://etf2l.org/forum/user/41782/

  25. Lyrete: BAGC - RUN! said:

    this guy? http://etf2l.org/forum/user/79166/

  26. Abyss: ᴅᴵ said:

    http://etf2l.org/forum/user/79166/ Allowed

  27. Abyss: ᴅᴵ said:

    Sever info?

  28. Lyrete: BAGC - RUN! said:

    9:41 PM – Lyrete.tf #fuckizaak: could we use this guy instead of our first merc? http://etf2l.org/forum/user/88992/
    9:43 PM – Lyrete.tf #fuckizaak: do you allow him?
    9:44 PM – ᴅᴵ Abyss: sure

  29. Lyrete: BAGC - RUN! said:

    Hope you enjoy your win

  30. Mearlite: JEPIC said:

    gg was fun for some

  31. Abyss: ᴅᴵ said:

    As we rightfully should do.

  32. Lyrete: BAGC - RUN! said:

    especially the day before the game 8)

  33. Maxi: Feeder - doge said:

    It’s a bit cheeky of you not allowing div5 mercs

  34. Mearlite: JEPIC said:

    aeiou

  35. Abyss: ᴅᴵ said:

    For a game which has been wildcarded twice you probably should have had your actual team organised, there no need to get salty over mercs game was fun GG.

  36. Maxi: Feeder - doge said:

    It got defaulted to a date we couldn’t change. You even said you couldn’t play from the 27th to the 30th, and then were scrimming yesterday when we had our whole team.

  37. Abyss: ᴅᴵ said:

    We weren’t scrimming with our whole main roster, and it doesn’t really matter but when dates get se,t you have to be prepared to turn up to them, that is just the very nature of how games get played. Don’t try and make it seem like your team’s lack of organisation is somehow our fault because it isn’t.

  38. Lyrete: BAGC - RUN! said:

    no we’re just making it seem like you don’t want to play against a good team :)

  39. Lyrete: BAGC - RUN! said:

    its perfectly fine you want to win but just admit it :)

  40. Callum: NASA said:

    all aboard the banter bus!!!!!

  41. Callum: NASA said:

    ‘ok guys we’ll say we cant play on this date (30th) but we will scrim with 2 mercs and force the enemy team to play on a day where they have to play with 2 mercs because thats a good thing to do right guys???’

  42. Callum: NASA said:

    and then proceed to deny any div5 mercs

  43. Abyss: ᴅᴵ said:

    There is no question as to the fact of whether or not it benefits us to play against a worse team, thats obvious, but you seem to be under the illusion that its our responsibility to make your team better and make acceptions for your failures and lack of organisation which is just simply not the case. You lost, get over it and stop having a chip on your shoulder about the mercs.

  44. Abyss: ᴅᴵ said:

    If the date is set to the 31st, then you play on the 31st, not really sure what you don’t understand about that.

  45. Lyrete: BAGC - RUN! said:

    Stop twisting my words like this, it’s demonizing me :)

  46. Lyrete: BAGC - RUN! said:

    the thing is we couldve forced the date to a date when you couldnt play since you had one date you could play on when we couldve played this whole week. But I wanted to be nice and said that friday’s not ideal but it’s fine with the notice. Clearly I should’ve just said we can’t do friday

    :)

    Just admit you wanted to win this bad and I’ll be done with this :)

  47. Menty: ist doof said:

    this is great banter!!!

  48. Callum: NASA said:

    exactly what lyrete said, they could’ve played you last night and denied all of your d5 mercs and beat you, but they thought it was a dick move so they said that they would play on friday with mercs

  49. Callum: NASA said:

    just gunna leave this here for the BANTER: http://pastebin.com/xE1S3etk

  50. Ignis: CRUNGE said:

    we’re gonna deny every div5 player to win
    hl divs matter in 6s !!!!!

  51. Duckie: Devon - lol hl said:

    Can Callum play in our official on the 6th?

  52. Lyrete: BAGC - RUN! said:

    no he’s too good sorry :)

  53. Mearlite: JEPIC said:

    top notch stuff. I thought we agreed on friday anyway when we talked last week, you in no way made it seem like you wouldn’t have a full roster for then, so it seemed best for both teams.

  54. Mearlite: JEPIC said:

    jesus does that pastebin ever end

  55. Lyrete: BAGC - RUN! said:

    we agreed on friday because that was the only day you could play not because it was ideal :)

    and no it does not.

    Just let Abyss dig his own grave, don’t jump into it as well.

  56. Mhaysun said:

    At the end of the day its just banter innit.

  57. Lyrete: BAGC - RUN! said:

    i think we crossed the point of banter a while back

  58. Collaide: gatekeeper said:

    Lyrete sucks end of story

  59. Abyss: ᴅᴵ said:

    ITT: Buttblasted mercs getting btfo.

  60. Mearlite: JEPIC said:

    I never said friday was the only day, I said it was the best day for us and you agreed, you never said it would be bad for you.

  61. Mearlite: JEPIC said:

    and how could you have forced us to play on another day if the default day was friday?

  62. Lyrete: BAGC - RUN! said:

    by saying on the match page that we cant play friday before the date was given :)

    I was fairly reluctant to play on friday, but it’s fine you don’t want to remember that, why would you. Should still take the advice and just let abyss come accross as the dick.

  63. Mearlite: JEPIC said:

    Is the issue here that we “forced” you to play on Friday? I don’t really get what the complaint is now, you didn’t tell me you would need mercs for Friday when we arranged the match , so I assumed that both teams could play, simple as that. All we did was turn up to a date that both leaders agreed to.

  64. Lyrete: BAGC - RUN! said:

    no the issue is that abyss is blaming us for “relying on merc” when I was cooperative with the matchdate but apparently he doesnt have an ounce of nicety in him to make some leeway for us.

  65. Lyrete: BAGC - RUN! said:

    as said, let him be the dick and take yourself out of this.

  66. Abyss: ᴅᴵ said:

    Reluctant to play =/= can’t play without mercs
    Its your own organisational failure which has gotten you into this mess and your refusal to accept that and move on is the reason why to us, you “come accross as the dick” as you described it.

  67. Abyss: ᴅᴵ said:

    You played with 2 allowed mercs, you have nothing to complain about.

  68. Lyrete: BAGC - RUN! said:

    yes its my own failure that you dont allow multiple people who fill your criteria but then refuse to tell whats the problem :)

  69. Abyss: ᴅᴵ said:

    “abyss is blaming us for relying on merc”
    If you are seriously implying that teams shouldn’t be responsible for the organisation of their own players to meet etf2l match requirements then I don’t know why you are playing in this league.

  70. Abyss: ᴅᴵ said:

    First of all I told you exactly what the problem was, which to be honest isn’t even necessary for me to do so because teams have a right to accept and deny mercs as they please so I can’t see what you are complaining about there, secondly you played with 6, it isn’t like you were forced to play with 5 or anything like that, you had mercs which were allowed which is what you were expecting to be playing with anyway because you knew that some of your main roster wasn’t going to be there. So I can’t see what you are complaining about here either.

  71. Abyss: ᴅᴵ said:

    Overall I feel like you are trying to create an issue out of something that isn’t actually there.

  72. Lyrete: BAGC - RUN! said:

    As I said I would be much finer with you denying mercs if you’d have just admitted it from the start but having to go through that discussion without you still coming up with criteria that didn’t contradict with what you’d already said was so obnoxious it wasn’t even funny.

    There is only one problem here and we all know what that is :)

  73. Abyss: ᴅᴵ said:

    “B-buht..but… m-my mercs”

    Sorry my dearest special snowflake but not everyone on this world is going to act and communicate in accordance with your subjective view of how it is best to coordinate ones self.
    Objectively speaking there is nothing wrong with the way I handled the mercs and I had complete legitimacy to do and say everything I did. Its a great shame that you can’t look past your blind rage in order to see that you actually have nothing credible or relevant to offer this discussion. The thing which is funny to me is that you really are trying to complain about a non-existent issue whilst at the same time genuinely believing that you for some reason have an entitlement to do so.

  74. Lyrete: BAGC - RUN! said:

    At what point was the issue about the mercs rather than you not actually openly answering the questions i made, I’d like to know. :)

  75. Abyss: ᴅᴵ said:

    Mercs is all you seem to be complaining about my friend, the entire reason you are so angry about this is because you didn’t get to use specific mercs. There was never an issue about me not answering questions because A) I would be more than within my right anyway to allow or deny mercs without needing to pander to your interview needs, and B) I answered all the questions you asked me anyway out of courtsey. But if you want to completely miss the entire point and avoid the question then hey, who am I to stop you? You are more than welcome to make yourself look like an idiot all you want.

  76. Lyrete: BAGC - RUN! said:

    I’m fairly sure this discussion has made it seem like there are two idiots but I am not the bigger one of the two.

  77. Lyrete: BAGC - RUN! said:

    And it’s good you know what I’m angry about so well, maybe you should spend that time on thinking about how to not contradict yourself in the future :)

  78. Abyss: ᴅᴵ said:

    Oh I’m so sorry, was I meant to not humour your non-existent issue ramblings and complaints? how stupid of me, I suppose you will say that I should have just let you wallow in your own ignorance thinking that we somehow wronged you in the upcoming proceedings of this match. Ah well never mind, its too late now and the truth is out so I guess you’ll have to face up to it and stop avoiding the facts sometime.

  79. Mearlite: JEPIC said:

    Does anyone have any idea what they are actually complaining about here? First its about not allowing the mercs you want, then its about the date we played on (even though you agreed it was fine) but apparently we forced you to play on it?. Then you complain that we scrimmed the day before the official (how horrible of us?), and how we should be worshipping you for not forcing us to play on another day even though you already agreed to friday. Then suddenly you don’t care about us playing on friday, that the ENTIRE issue is that Abyss thinks its bad you have to rely on 2 mercs??. (“no the issue is that abyss is blaming us for “relying on merc””). I cannot keep track of what the hell is going on here.

  80. Lyrete: BAGC - RUN! said:

    Yes that was exactly my point it’s good that you’re so good at reading people :)

  81. Abyss: ᴅᴵ said:

    Let me just get this straight…
    So I said “the entire reason you are so angry about this is because you didn’t get to use specific mercs”
    To which your response was “And it’s good you know what I’m angry about”
    So you’ve agreed that that is what you are angry about ok good…

    But wait.. just earlier you said “At what point was the issue about the mercs rather than you not actually openly answering the questions i made”
    So you implied that it wasn’t the fact that you didn’t mind not playing with your specific mercs, but rather because of the conversation that is the issue and therefore made you upset?

    I don’t know if you realise this, but saying you are angry about two different issues when you made out on both occasions that it was the single issue that you were angry about is actually contradicting yourself.
    And to think you actually have the nerve to blindly spout accusations of contradictions in what I’ve said. Maybe you should actually concentrate on making your own thoughts coherent first.

  82. Lyrete: BAGC - RUN! said:

    Have you heard about a thing called sarcasm? Thought someone who spends this much time to sound smart would know what it is.

  83. Mearlite: JEPIC said:

    nah Britain doesnt have sarcasm

  84. Lyrete: BAGC - RUN! said:

    Ah yes I forgot about that.

  85. Abyss: ᴅᴵ said:

    I was not responding to “Yes that was exactly my point it’s good that you’re so good at reading people” in my “Let me just get this straight” post, I was responding to “spend that time on thinking about how to not contradict yourself in the future :)”
    Making responses such as “Have you heard about a thing called sarcasm?” is simply avoiding the contradiction I bought up and it makes me think that you’ve realised that you were wrong but don’t want to admit it and persistently choose to try and cover it up.
    Althrough having said all that, there is one thing which I have agreed on that you’ve said, and that is that you’re an idiot.
    “but I am not the bigger one of the two”

  86. Lyrete: BAGC - RUN! said:

    Was I saying that was the only thing that had sarcasm in it? You clearly don’t know what it is then when you’ve not been able to read how about everything I’ve put on this page was dripping in it.

  87. Abyss: ᴅᴵ said:

    If that was true bud then you would have given up this conversation a looooong time ago. This whole “sarcasm” angle you’ve introduced is just maximum damage control because you know that you’ve been completely blown out and left with nothing relevant to say and nothing to complain about.

  88. Lyrete: BAGC - RUN! said:

    It’s good you know what I am doing. :)

  89. Abyss: ᴅᴵ said:

    “I didn’t mean any of it guys honest”
    I hope you understand how ridiculous you sound.

  90. Lyrete: BAGC - RUN! said:

    You must clearly be the god that you really make yourself out to be so I’m sorry I’m not ready to be condescended about things since I don’t believe in a god.

  91. Mearlite: JEPIC said:

    the whole situation http://i.imgur.com/Rhf6O2K.jpg?1
    good jab

  92. Abyss: ᴅᴵ said:

    “You must clearly be the god that you really make yourself out to be so I’m sorry I’m not ready to be condescended about things since I don’t believe in a god.”
    Nice Straw Man you have there.

  93. Abyss: ᴅᴵ said:

    >Gets butthurt over nothing
    >Complains about being butthurt over nothing
    >Gets BTFO
    >B-but.. I-I w-was only k-kiddin guys…
    >Maximum damage control
    >Desperately attempting to throw out personal insults

    Good Job Lyrete, you’ve really shown how you had a good point here.
    (If you couldn’t tell, that was sarcastic.. but of course, you’d know all about that right?)

  94. Lyrete: BAGC - RUN! said:

    k. I’m happy for you that you could double the size of your epenis by thinking you won an internet argument about “nothing”.

    Just remember 0x2 is still 0.

  95. Abyss: ᴅᴵ said:

    Yes I can feel my “epenis” already growing to a disproportionate size. You may be correct in saying that it was about nothing but to you it was something because you genuinely believed you had a right to start complaining at me and my team, so actually the maths equation would look something like this:
    Abyss 0+0=0
    Lyrete 0-1= -1

  96. Lyrete: BAGC - RUN! said:

    I was never complaining at your team to be honest :)

    But that’s not the first thing you’ve twisted to your liking :)

  97. Abyss: ᴅᴵ said:

    If you complained at me then you complained at my team because I make decisions based around the team and what the team wants.

  98. Duckie: Devon - lol hl said:

    Who knew div 5 could be so tense and invigorating!

    I hope there are no objections to:
    Division 5 Players.
    Playing our official against you gentlemen/ladies?

  99. Abyss: ᴅᴵ said:

    Don’t be dumb, if you had been actively following this thread then you would have realised that division 5 players playing in division 5 games was never an issue to begin with and never will be.

  100. Callum: NASA said:

    100

  101. Lyrete: BAGC - RUN! said:

    good job on getting the issue right abyss :)

  102. Duckie: Devon - lol hl said:

    I assume that “Actively Following” Is reading 100+ comments of people bitching and moaning about trivial matters?

    I choose to spent my time more effectively.

    Congrats on 100 Callum!

    Me and Callum are here for the banter.

  103. Mearlite: JEPIC said:

    im here for memes

  104. Abyss: ᴅᴵ said:

    “I assume that “Actively Following” Is reading 100+ comments of people bitching and moaning about trivial matters”
    If you’re not willing to do that you shouldn’t be making assumptions about whats going on.

  105. Collaide: gatekeeper said:

    HAHAHAHAHAH just had the laugh of my life.

    Lyrete, if you care about officials, you should care about scheduling them properly.

    “HL divs don’t matter”. No of course not. 6s divs don’t matter in HL too. A prem 6v6 player should realistically start in division 6 in ETF2L and steel in UGC. And vice versa. Kappa

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.